No Galloway-Yes Coulter - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

silent_jay · 03-22-2010, 01:52 PM

So our lovely immigration minister banned George Galloway from entering Canada last year, yet Ann Coulter is fine to come here and speak to our university students, now I'm all for free speech but come on, ban one let the other in, even with the comments she's made about this country i nthe past like '[Canadians] better hope the United States does not roll over one night and crush them. They are lucky we allow them to exist on the same continent', or her insisting that we sent soldiers to help fight the Vietnam War, then telling the CBC she would get back to them, but of course she didn't because she was wrong.

Now we have hate speech laws here, and some of the things she has said i nthe past have been controversial, possibly bordering on hate speech, comments like

Quote:

Bumper sticker idea for liberals: News magazines don't kill people, Muslims do.

Quote:

We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity.

Quote:

I think our motto should be, post-9-11, 'raghead talks tough, raghead faces consequences.

Quote:

Six imams removed from a US Airways flight from Minneapolis to Phoenix are calling on Muslims to boycott the airline. If only we could get Muslims to boycott all airlines, we could dispense with airport security altogether.

Those are just a few examples, many more can be found here
Ann Coulter - Wikiquote

I guess my question is, does Jason Keeney have a double standard on who he allows to speak i nthe country i nthis situation? I mean Galloway banned, Coulter allowed, I don't know, I reckon he does, I know myself I'd never go see Coulter speak, bt maybe that's just me and this is a non issue. Or maybe I'm just tired of al lthe threads about US health care and I want something else to be at the top of the politics forums haha.

Baraka_Guru · 03-22-2010, 02:47 PM

Well, you know, if you support the plight of the Palestinians, you're an anti-Semite.

But it's okay to hate on Muslims, because they're anti-Semite too.

I hope this "logic" isn't what's at play, but sometimes I wonder.

Cimarron29414 · 03-23-2010, 11:54 AM

So what did Galloway say to get banned? I see it was because of "his views on Afghanistan", but I doubt it was for his views. I'm pretty certain it was for the way he spoke on those views. Without his speech to measure next to Coulter's, I'd say the thread's dead, Zed. The thread's dead.

silent_jay · 03-23-2010, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Kenney's office said the 54-year-old Scot has expressed sympathy for the Taliban in Afghanistan and provided financial aid to the Palestinian militant group Hamas.

CBC News - Canada - British MP barred from Canada
There is no speech to measure, otherwise I would have posted said speech in my first post.

Cimarron29414 · 03-23-2010, 12:31 PM

Okay, so I saw dozens of YouTube videos where he called upon the Afghans to rise up and kill his countrymen and Canadians. That's a bit different than Coulter's sarcasm.

silent_jay · 03-23-2010, 12:51 PM

Love how you call Coulters 'sarcasm', guess hers is sarcasm because it fits your point of view and Galloways obviously doesn't, so as I said in my first post, there is a double standard, and maybe you don't know seeing as you're American, we have laws against hate speech here which some of Coulters comments obviously are.

I'm still laughing over that 'sarcasm' comment, too funny.

Quote:

Bumper sticker idea for liberals: News magazines don't kill people, Muslims do.

So that's sarcasm? Sounds like something else to me.
As for Galloway talking about Afghans killing Brits, how is that any different from:

Quote:

We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity.

Cimarron29414 · 03-23-2010, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by silent_jay

Love how you call Coulters 'sarcasm', guess hers is sarcasm because it fits your point of view and Galloways obviously doesn't, so as I said in my first post, there is a double standard, and maybe you don't know seeing as you're American, we have laws against hate speech here which some of Coulters comments obviously are.

I'm still laughing over that 'sarcasm' comment, too funny.

So that's sarcasm? Sounds like something else to me.
As for Galloway talking about Afghans killing Brits, how is that any different from:

First of all, don't for one second assume you know my position because "I am an American" or that I agree with Coulter.

Actually, I agree with you on that one statement. It was definitely over the line. Of course, she is merely reversing what she believes to be the mantra of radical islam "To kill the leaders and convert the people to Islam". Again, it's a play on words but is definitely over the line.

There is a fundamental difference here. Coulter is not calling on the killing of Canadians, Galloway is. I can see why a leader of a nation would not welcome someone whose encouraging people to kill his citizens. Certainly you can at least see that?

Anyway, clearly, you have your mind made up about this. Why create a thread and invite discussion? Why not just blog about it?

silent_jay · 03-23-2010, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cimarron29414

First of all, don't for one second assume you know my position because "I am an American" or that I agree with Coulter.

Never said I know your position because you're American now did I, try reading it again, I was saying we have laws against hate speech here, something I didn't know if you knew we had or not, sorry for trying to explain somehthing, it won't happen again.

Quote:

There is a fundamental difference here. Coulter is not calling on the killing of Canadians, Galloway is. I can see why a leader of a nation would not welcome someone whose encouraging people to kill his citizens. Certainly you can at least see that?

Oh I can see that, but I also don't see why they'd want someone who seems to think we're lucky to exist on the same continent as the US speaking in this country, or someone who doesn't seem to understand the basics of history about wether or not Canada sent troopps to fight in Vietnam.

Quote:

[Canadians] better hope the United States does not roll over one night and crush them. They are lucky we allow them to exist on the same continent'

Quote:

Anyway, clearly, you have your mind made up about this. Why create a thread and invite discussion? Why not just blog about it?

Ummm why start a thread on anything here? Most people who start threads here have thier minds already made up, see anything pan has started in the last year, be a pretty shitty forum if everyone had your attitude about thread starting, oh well my minds made up, I'll just blog it.

CandleInTheDark · 03-23-2010, 04:03 PM

Not that I agree with banning either person from Canada for their views, I am a bit incredulous that you cannot see the difference in kind -- rather than scale -- between Coulter's quotations and Galloway's (alleged, because I cannot find any quotations) remarks.

The more troubling issue for me is that a University authority and student union president are actively thwarting and interfering in this talk. If our universities are supposed to function as a free and open exchange of ideas, why are these authority figures attempting to thwart such an exchange through 'hate speech' chill, as it were. Quite frankly I would be embarrassed to be a student at th

silent_jay · 03-23-2010, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CandleInTheDark

Not that I agree with banning either person from Canada for their views, I am a bit incredulous that you cannot see the difference in kind -- rather than scale -- between Coulter's quotations and Galloway's (alleged, because I cannot find any quotations) remarks.

Oh I can see the difference, my main point is the double standard, Pro-Palestinian, no can't enter the country, he's bad mouthed the perfect Israel, and we all know Israel never does anything wrong, like forge passports to kill someone. Anti-Islam, fearmongering, welcome, welcome to our country, why yes we know we're lucky to exist on the same continent as the great USofA, thank you for allowing it Mrs. Coulter, it all just seems wrong to me, then again Jason Kenney doesn't exactly appear to be the brightest minister on the hill.

CandleInTheDark · 03-23-2010, 04:32 PM

I think you are reading into this too much. As I read further on the situation, Galloway was banned from entry for providing financial support a listed terrorist organization(Reference). Now, you can make the argument that Hamas is not a terrorist organization, or that the evidence for support is not adequate to support CBSA's conclusion of financial support. But Galloway was not banned for his speech.

silent_jay · 03-23-2010, 04:40 PM

Did I say he was banned for his speech though? Check my post #4 I posted this quote to show Cimarron why he was banned

Quote:

Kenney's office said the 54-year-old Scot has expressed sympathy for the Taliban in Afghanistan and provided financial aid to the Palestinian militant group Hamas.

No where in this thread have I said he was banned for his speech, that would be Cimarron who has said that.

CandleInTheDark · 03-23-2010, 05:06 PM

My apologies for the misread of the thread, but then I have to ask "Where is the comparison?"

If you are not speaking to the comments or viewpoints expressed by Mr. Galloway, then there is no analysis to be made as to why he was barred from entry and Ms. Coulter will not be.

Edit: Not to say I don't think Ann Coulter's talk is not an important issue to discuss, but for the reasons I outline in my first post, not your Galloway v. Coulter analysis of government action.

WinchesterAA · 03-23-2010, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru

Well, you know, if you support the plight of the Palestinians, you're an anti-Semite.

But it's okay to hate on Muslims, because they're anti-Semite too.

I hope this "logic" isn't what's at play, but sometimes I wonder.

I hope it's not, either, because everyone you just mentioned is semitic...

Baraka_Guru · 03-23-2010, 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WinchesterAA

I hope it's not, either, because everyone you just mentioned is semitic...

Anti-Semite refers specifically to hostility and prejudice against Jews.

ottopilot · 03-23-2010, 07:08 PM

Who is this Ann Coulter "Guy" anyway? ...I'm just sayin'

My hat is off to Mr. Coulter for filing a hate-speech complaint against the University of Ottowa.

Quote:

Speaking to students and academics at the University of Western Ontario Monday, Coulter said the e-mail sent to her Friday by Francois Houle, vice-president academic and provost of the University of Ottawa, targeted her as a member of an identifiable group and as such, she will be filing a complaint with the Human Rights Commission alleging hate speech.

“I’m sure the Human Rights Commission will get to the bottom of it,” Coulter said to loud cheers from the 800-strong audience. “I think I’m the victim of a hate crime here. Either what (Mr. Houle) did was a hate crime, or the whole commission is BS.”

I wish Mr. Coulter the best of luck! Perhaps some Canadian PC chickens have come home to roost.

silent_jay · 03-23-2010, 08:33 PM

Seems she's not welcome in Ottawa

Quote:

I knew something was up as I walked towards the University of Ottawa and saw security guards locking the exits surrounding the Marion building.

That's the building where American right-wing commentator Ann Coulter was about to give her much-hyped lecture this evening.

The University of Ottawa is one of three stops on the Ann Coulter's Canadian tour, organized by the International Free Press Society and the Clare Booth Policy Institute.

About 200 demonstrators turned out to shut down Coulter's talk.

And they succeeded.

Canadian conservative commentator Ezra Levant told the audience inside at about 8:10 p.m. that the event was cancelled. The audience was forced to leave through those very exits I saw university security locking.

Levant later wrote this message on Twitter: "Cops advised that proceeding with Coulter event in face of protesters would be dangerous to her and crowd."

Prior to the start of the event, hundreds of people were forced to wait in the rain while organizers tried to usher people through.

As the demonstration escalated, about two dozen police officers and university security guards also showed up to try and quell the crowd.

Outside on the steps of the building's entrance, protestors held up signs while reciting some of Coulter's past quotes, such as: "we should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity."

Other protestors chanted "this is a safe space."

Then at 7:41 p.m., security officials told the crowd outside that someone pulled the fire alarm and tried to get those in line to back away from the doors.

After about 15 minutes, people started to file back into the building, until the event was called off.

One male in his early twenties was escorted out of the foyer of the building by an Ottawa police officer.

Protestors claimed victory, chanting "whose campus? Our campus!" at the entrance to the lecture hall.

Coulter's circus comes to town, but can't perform - Inside Politics

ottopilot · 03-23-2010, 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by silent_jay

Seems she's not welcome in Ottawa

Coulter's circus comes to town, but can't perform - Inside Politics

Yes, the effects of the hateful email written by the University's VP has incited the potential for even more Canadian mob-violence and hate-crimes.

silent_jay · 03-23-2010, 09:25 PM

Canadian mob violence, nice considering there was no mention of violence in the article, I mean what were they going to be doused with maple syrup and pelted with beavertails.

CandleInTheDark · 03-24-2010, 05:04 AM

"Levant later wrote this message on Twitter: "Cops advised that proceeding with Coulter event in face of protesters would be dangerous to her and crowd.""

How does this not imply violence against Ms. Coulter was, at the very least, a possibility?

That said, she won't get far with her complaint to the human rights commissions in Canada. If you're not the right kind of victim they don't want to here from you. The whole system is a farce of Kangaroo trials. But that's neither here nor there.

The Mr. Houle and his partner in crime, U of O Student President, were certainly successful in generating a campaign against her talk. I am much more concerned that they would seek to prevent the free exchange of ideas at their school. We would not accept such behaviour in other institutions, why is it acceptable here?

ottopilot · 03-24-2010, 05:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by silent_jay

Canadian mob violence, nice considering there was no mention of violence in the article, I mean what were they going to be doused with maple syrup and pelted with beavertails.

I believe the phrase was "the POTENTIAL for even more Canadian mob-violence and hate-crimes." Geez... count to ten, breath.... in... out...

Leto · 03-24-2010, 05:52 AM

yah, so I didn't think she was a political, but more of an entertainer like Colbert, but harsher:

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/tilted-...lter-real.html

Cimarron29414 · 03-24-2010, 06:25 AM

Silent Jay,

You framed the entire OP as if there was some sort of equivalency to their "transgressions". As I did not know who Galloway was, I assumed you acted in good faith and that this was basically a free speech double-standard. I immediately requested that you provide speech of his to compare. However, you did not act in good faith - you left off a critical piece of information. Galloway provided material support to Hamas - an organization listed in Canada as a terrorist organization.

So, while I did make an assumption that he was banned for his speech, that assumption was based on a belief that you had provided us with all of the information - which you had not. Furthermore, you didn't even provide "speech" of Galloway to compare to Coulter's.

In spite of that fact, we had already begun to debate the "speech" of Coulter, so I continued on that path - the path you set up in your OP and the path that you chose in your responses.

You are attempting to do a bait and switch and blame me for saying he was banned for speech. The fact is that it was a disingenuous OP that created that assumption.

silent_jay · 03-24-2010, 08:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cimarron29414

Silent Jay,

You framed the entire OP as if there was some sort of equivalency to their "transgressions". As I did not know who Galloway was, I assumed you acted in good faith and that this was basically a free speech double-standard. I immediately requested that you provide speech of his to compare. However, you did not act in good faith - you left off a critical piece of information. Galloway provided material support to Hamas - an organization listed in Canada as a terrorist organization.

Ummm you asked for a speech yes, and I showed you why he was banned in the post after that, but hey this thread is dead so why are you posting here? I never left it out, I figured the Canadians knew why he was banned, and looking at Baraka's post he did, sorry if you didn't, a simple Google search would have told you why. But nowhere did I say what they did was equal, merely one was banned and the other wasn't banned.

Quote:

So, while I did make an assumption that he was banned for his speech, that assumption was based on a belief that you had provided us with all of the information - which you had not. Furthermore, you didn't even provide "speech" of Galloway to compare to Coulter's.

There wasn't a speech of Galloways to compare, look at post 4 it shows why he was banned, not my fault you assumed it was for speech, nowhere have I said he was banned for his speech or that he was banned for anything compared to Coulter, you made those assumptions on your own without knowing what was going on.

Quote:

You are attempting to do a bait and switch and blame me for saying he was banned for speech. The fact is that it was a disingenuous OP that created that assumption.

Blame you, not blaming you for anything, maybe you shouldn't assume things, like I actually care enough to blame you for anything, are all your posts all about you? seems to be a trend, me, me, me, me, and I'm not baiting and switching anything, and calling something a fact, doesn't make it one, my op is what it is, you've already called it a dead thread, yet continue to post, so....

---------- Post added at 09:06 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:00 AM ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by ottopilot

I believe the phrase was "the POTENTIAL for even more Canadian mob-violence and hate-crimes." Geez... count to ten, breath.... in... out...

Oh sorry I missed a word potential Canadian mob violence, nice considering there was no mention of violence in the article, I mean what were they going to be doused with maple syrup and pelted with beavertails. Like we have so much mob violence here, I mean every day its on the news, mob kills old lady with beavertails, mob douses baby in syrup, just such a regular occurance there must have to be more.

As fo counting to ten, really? Thats all you have, so disappointed in the great ottopiliot, he's resorted to things I said as a little kid, wow must be time to give up the smartass comments if thats all you have left.

Shauk · 03-24-2010, 09:00 AM

Coulter is on my list of people to push off a bridge, given the opportunity.

ottopilot · 03-24-2010, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by silent_jay

Ummm you asked for a speech yes, and I showed you why he was banned in the post after that, but hey this thread is dead so why are you posting here? I never left it out, I figured the Canadians knew why he was banned, and looking at Baraka's post he did, sorry if you didn't, a simple Google search would have told you why. But nowhere did I say what they did was equal, merely one was banned and the other wasn't banned.

There wasn't a speech of Galloways to compare, look at post 4 it shows why he was banned, not my fault you assumed it was for speech, nowhere have I said he was banned for his speech or that he was banned for anything compared to Coulter, you made those assumptions on your own without knowing what was going on.

Blame you, not blaming you for anything, maybe you shouldn't assume things, like I actually care enough to blame you for anything, are all your posts all about you? seems to be a trend, me, me, me, me, and I'm not baiting and switching anything, and calling something a fact, doesn't make it one, my op is what it is, you've already called it a dead thread, yet continue to post, so....

---------- Post added at 09:06 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:00 AM ----------

Oh sorry I missed a word potential Canadian mob violence, nice considering there was no mention of violence in the article, I mean what were they going to be doused with maple syrup and pelted with beavertails. Like we have so much mob violence here, I mean every day its on the news, mob kills old lady with beavertails, mob douses baby in syrup, just such a regular occurance there must have to be more.

As fo counting to ten, really? Thats all you have, so disappointed in the great ottopiliot, he's resorted to things I said as a little kid, wow must be time to give up the smartass comments if thats all you have left.

I was concerned that you may be in distress and merely suggested a composure and relaxation technique. But I am honored that you think so highly of me... the "great ottopilot", Mom will be proud.

From the Drudge Report:
FLASH: Ann Coulter Ottawa speech shut down... 2000 protesters surrounding building with rocks and sticks

Quote:

2000 protesters surrounding building with rocks and sticks -- pulled fire alarm in building. Cops shut it down! Blogs calling for Coulter to be hurt. MPs were banned from going, Coulter denounced by an MP in the Parliement.

It seems that gangs of Canadian hate-speechers have finally abandoned their signature beaver-tails and syrup.

it's a sign of the Apocalypse

courage.

Leto · 03-24-2010, 10:28 AM

Wait! Beavertails???? where???

silent_jay · 03-24-2010, 10:29 AM

You were only concerned with keeping up appearances of being a smartass, and obviously not a very effective onne at all, back to the drawing board, and don't let great go to your head.

Seriously you're going with Drudge? Good chuckle though, needed that, weathers a bit dreary here today. I mean it made it on the Hannity forums so it must be true, haha. How did they know all 2000 had 'rocks and sticks', did they take a poll? Ask everyone to show them?

Canadian hate speechers haha, thats a good one,, considering the things that comes out of Coulters mouth like telling a Muslim student to 'ride a camel' because she didn't ahve a flying carpet, we're pretty low on the scale of idiot people who preach hate.

I'll add this for you to read as well, maybe inform yourself rather than assuming you know it all

Quote:

Okay, so I've been trying to sort through the hyperbole and rhetoric emanating from all sides in the aftermath of last night's Ann Coulter incendiary non-appearance at the University of Ottawa, and as is so often the case with such chaotic events, it's proving a wee bit difficult to separate the truth from the spin -- and again, that applies to both sides here. I'm still in the process of attempting to figure out what, exactly, happened, but I thought I may as well post what I've been able to confirm so far.

First, contrary to what Coulter seems to suggest in a brief phone interview with Macleans.ca scribe Colby Cosh, it was not the police who "shut it down." I spoke with Ottawa Police Services media relations officer Alain Boucher this morning, and he told me, in no uncertain terms, that it was her security team that made the decision to call off the event. "We gave her options" -- including, he said, to "find a bigger venue" -- but "they opted to cancel ... It's not up to the Ottawa police to make that decision."

Boucher's statements are seemingly at odds with the account provided via twitter by Ezra Levant, who was supposed to appear on stage alongside Coulter. Several hours after the event had been called off, he tweeted that "Cops advised that proceeding with Coulter event in face of protesters would be dangerous to her and crowd," and quoted a Sgt. Dan Beauchamp as saying that shutting down the event was "a public safety issue," as well as an unnamed "police officer" who allegedly said that the OPS "cannot guarantee her safety." He also corrected an early report from Calgary radio host Rob Breakenridge, who tweeted that the speech was kiboshed because of a fire alarm, claiming that "it was the threat of violence, say cops."

As for Coulter's claim that the police "had been warning my bodyguard all day that they were putting up [messages] on Facebook: 'Bring rocks, bring sticks, you gotta hurt Ann Coulter tonight, don't let her speak,'" Boucher confirmed that the police were monitoring the situation - although how, exactly, he didn't specify - but was unable to provide any example of such a threat, as he did not have that information, although he assured me that if a complaint were lodged, the police would "surely" investigate, but he didn't know whether or not that had occurred. I haven't been able to turn up any of those alleged threats -- not on Facebook, and not on the unspecified "liberal blogs" that she has since cited as the source, so if anyone can point me to an example, please do so in the comments.

And now, the numbers. While there is pretty much universal agreement that event organizer Ashley Scorpio's initial claim of "2,000 violent protesters" is just plain wrong; she seems to have inadvertently mistaken the total number of people waiting outside, many of whom were there to attend the Coulter event, with the number of protesters, which have been variously estimated between a few dozen to 200.

In addition to the real-time coverage provided by Colleague Hicks -- whose post-event summary can be found here, and who was tweeting throughout the evening -- here's a rough timeline of how things unfolded, courtesy of someone who was on the scene both outside the venue and inside the room:

6:30: About 400 people in line, which probably grew to about 600+ by 7:00
7:00: Doors still not open, people getting really antsy given poor logistics (more on this later)
7:10 or so: Started letting people in one by one, checking them off on a list
7:30ish: Fire alarm goes off, organizers stop allowing people in. Auditorium was 1/2 full = 200 people, but entire upper part was empty. 200+ seats open
7:45ish - Fire alarm stops, but still no more people get in
8:08 - Ezra comes out and comments about censorship, etc.

[Friend] was outside the entire time until they said they weren't letting anyone else in, and said there were about 300-400 people waiting to get in and maybe 20-50 loud protestors.

Inside - there were maybe 8 anti-Coulter types, and their big impact was to chant 'Ann go home' for about 45 seconds, which inspired two women in front to start yelling back and challenge them to a slap off.

They added: "At no time was there any evidence of physical threat. To the extent that there were safety issues, it was because you had 600 people coming out for a talk and the organizers had absolutely no logistical plan to handle it. People annoyed like they get annoyed waiting to get into a jammed hockey game. But no 'threat' environment.

Finally, an observation from a CBC reporter who was in the Foyer while Coulter was being interviewed by CTV's Power Play: At approximately 5:15pm, he overheard a member of her security team tell a Conservative MP that her event "may be cancelled," which would suggest that the decision to do so was already being considered before more than half the crowd had assembled outside the venue -- hopeful speech-goers and protesters alike. Coulter herself, meanwhile, told Cosh that she never actually left the Rideau Club -- where she was the guest of honour at a $250 per head private reception -- for the university. Given the travel times involved, and the 7:30 pm start time, she would likely have had to do so by 7pm at the latest in order to make it in time.

So, what does it all mean? Was the cancellation motivated by genuine concern over "violent protesters" or Facebook threats -- or something else? I can't say I've come to any firm conclusion, but given reports that she plans to file a human rights complaint, it seems like it's worth it to keep digging away at the seemingly contradictory accounts of last night's events. I'll update this post with any additional information. I've also sent an email to both Levant and Scorpio asking for more details.

Got to love it when people get caught telling stories, 2000 seems to be 200 if lucky, oh poor Ann always trying to spin it so she looks good, and otto falls for it hook line and sinker, explains a lot really.....

Quote:

Right-wing firebrand Ann Coulter, who cancelled her speech to the University of Ottawa Tuesday night over fears for her safety, says she’s the victim of a hate crime under Canadian laws.

She said she’s hired Canadian conservative activist Ezra Levant to prepare a human-rights complaint that will test how equitably these hate-crime laws are applied.

In an interview with The Globe, Ms. Coulter suggested the University of Ottawa’s provost, Francois Houle, is partly responsible for the angry crowds that opposed her speaking Tuesday night. He is the official who warned her in advance to watch what she said lest she incur criminal charges for hate speech.

The tribunal should take her complaint seriously, she said, “because either Francois [Houle] has created a climate of hate against me based on my membership in an identifiable group – or the whole human rights commission is complete horseshit."

Ms. Coulter said her aides told her protestors had been advised by some of her opponents to give her a rough welcome. “The liberal blogs were saying bring rocks and sticks and tar and feathers and don’t let Ann Coulter escape unharmed today."

The American conservative shock jock said Ottawans missed a “boffo speech" and the boisterous demonstrations only helped her prepare her human rights complaint.

“I would like to know if any Muslim has been treated this badly, at least since the Reformation, because I am drawing a blank," Ms. Coulter told The Globe.

She also took a swipe at Canadians, saying this country has lost its edge.

“You guys used to be so cool. You were smokers. You had epic hockey fights. We had half our comedians from Canada. Now you’re all a bunch of girls named Francois."

Oh we still like our hockey fights, but Americans can't really follow hockey well, so we had to pussy it up for them and their virgin eyes on violence.

As for her wanting to know if any Muslim has been treated as badly as her, well I'm sure they have, or at least been discriminated against from her idiotic comments, as for Mr. Houle creating an atmosphere of hate around her, I reckon her own words have done enough, considering what she's said about Canada in the past.

CandleInTheDark · 03-24-2010, 03:05 PM

Oh yes, let's blame the victim in this. I hardly call it an irrational decision for the organizers to cancel the talk, given 200 potentially violent protesters outside and no means of handling them. The U of O and it's Student Union created a hostile environment by actively opposing said talks. While Coulter is a divisive figure, you can hardly place the blame on her for an organized resistance to her talks.

How is it that the U of Calgary can ensure security (link) and the U of Ottawa cannot? Quite simply, it's a lack of will on the administration's part, and a hostile environment created by Mr. Houle and the Student's Union.

I'm sure they support free speech, but only if it's the right kind of speech.

silent_jay · 03-24-2010, 03:53 PM

Ever been to Alberta? If you have knowing why the U of Calgary can ensure her security should be a no brainer.

Quote:

I'm sure they support free speech, but only if it's the right kind of speech.

Yes just like Jason Kenney.

CandleInTheDark · 03-24-2010, 05:13 PM

We already established that Mr. Galloway was not barred from entry due to free speech issues, so your underhanded comment about Mr. Kenney is not conducive to discussion. Quite simply, ensuring a speaker's security should not be an issue, regardless of the political stripe of the campus or the speaker.

silent_jay · 03-24-2010, 05:23 PM

Well if he was banned for his views on the Taliban and supporting Hamas, I'm pretty sure the views on the Taliban have somehting to do with speech as he's have to speak to get these views across, unless he typed them, so it wasn't underhanded at all.

Quote:

Kenney's office said the 54-year-old Scot has expressed sympathy for the Taliban in Afghanistan and provided financial aid to the Palestinian militant group Hamas.

ottopilot · 03-24-2010, 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by silent_jay

You were only concerned with keeping up appearances of being a smartass, and obviously not a very effective onne at all, back to the drawing board, and don't let great go to your head.

Seriously you're going with Drudge? Good chuckle though, needed that, weathers a bit dreary here today. I mean it made it on the Hannity forums so it must be true, haha. How did they know all 2000 had 'rocks and sticks', did they take a poll? Ask everyone to show them?

Canadian hate speechers haha, thats a good one,, considering the things that comes out of Coulters mouth like telling a Muslim student to 'ride a camel' because she didn't ahve a flying carpet, we're pretty low on the scale of idiot people who preach hate.

I'll add this for you to read as well, maybe inform yourself rather than assuming you know it all

Got to love it when people get caught telling stories, 2000 seems to be 200 if lucky, oh poor Ann always trying to spin it so she looks good, and otto falls for it hook line and sinker, explains a lot really.....

Oh we still like our hockey fights, but Americans can't really follow hockey well, so we had to pussy it up for them and their virgin eyes on violence.

As for her wanting to know if any Muslim has been treated as badly as her, well I'm sure they have, or at least been discriminated against from her idiotic comments, as for Mr. Houle creating an atmosphere of hate around her, I reckon her own words have done enough, considering what she's said about Canada in the past.

My ass may be smart ... but (since you seem to enjoy name-calling) at least I'm not a whiny cry-baby smart ass. How's that?

#1 - I was mocking Ann Coulter (remember Mr. Coulter, who is this guy?)
#2 - You apparently took something the wrong way and made it personal
#3 - I was happy to oblige... your buttons are easily pushed

You're sometimes quick to slam the US, so I suppose it doesn't feel so good when it's dumped back in your lap. Regardless of 200 or 2000, it was still a group with violent intentions toward a personality delivering a speech. As far as the source, I just googled the headline and threw the first hit in to the post. It wasn't that important as far a I was concerned.

No, there obviously is not an epidemic of blood-thirsty hate-speech mobs in Canada. Except for the one that threatened Ann Coulter.

Ease up man... breath.

CandleInTheDark · 03-25-2010, 04:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by silent_jay

Well if he was banned for his views on the Taliban and supporting Hamas, I'm pretty sure the views on the Taliban have somehting to do with speech as he's have to speak to get these views across, unless he typed them, so it wasn't underhanded at all.

Firstly, the written word is still filed under free speech

Secondly, we've established he was barred from entry for second reason; material support to Hamas. He was not prevented from speaking to Canadians, as he decided to hold a video conference with Toronto-are United Church members. The sympathy for the Taliban is incidental information, and not the legal basis for barring Mr. Galloway entry. Nor did is stop him speaking to Canadians, just as such expressions of sympathy have not stopped NDP, Green, and Liberal candidates from speaking though it may not be so kind to the (re-)election chances.

silent_jay · 03-25-2010, 06:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ottopilot

My ass may be smart ... but (since you seem to enjoy name-calling) at least I'm not a whiny cry-baby smart ass. How's that?

Yes I've seen enough of your posts here to know, expect smartass comments after most of them, guess it gives your old ego a boost.

Quote:

#1 - I was mocking Ann Coulter (remember Mr. Coulter, who is this guy?)
#2 - You apparently took something the wrong way and made it personal
#3 - I was happy to oblige... your buttons are easily pushed

Yes I know you were mocking Coulter, not rocket science to figure it out. That was you making it personal, wow how lame, you need to learn how to do that better, at least make me laugh, that just made me feel sorry for you. Too bad Ustwo isn't still around, he could give you some lessons, he was at least funny about it, you not so much.

Quote:

You're sometimes quick to slam the US

Are you new to the forum? Have you seen some of the nutjobs we have post here from the US? Pretty easy to make fun of it really, just thankful I'm smart enough to not base my opinions of all Americans on some of their posts.

Quote:

so I suppose it doesn't feel so good when it's dumped back in your lap.

Really this is dumped back in my lap, again that's too bad, you're not very good at this game, maybe go back to schoo land try again.

Quote:

Regardless of 200 or 2000, it was still a group with violent intentions toward a personality delivering a speech. As far as the source, I just googled the headline and threw the first hit in to the post. It wasn't that important as far a I was concerned.

Violent intenions? Hmmmm seems the cops have a different attitude than you do, have yoyu read why the speech was cancelled, not because of violence or threats, I mean Coulters travel buddies will tell you that, but that's just because they're hoping for a nude pic of the vagina on a stick.

Quote:

No, there obviously is not an epidemic of blood-thirsty hate-speech mobs in Canada. Except for the one that threatened Ann Coulter.

Ease up man... breath.

Threatened her, naw she wasn't threatened, she was just treated like she seems to think MUslims should be treated.....like shit.

As for blood thirsty mobs, we keep the dk's of Canada under control, and from the looks of the health care threads here, you guys have way more crazies who are looking for blood than we do, have fun with them, looks enjoyable.

Tully Mars · 03-25-2010, 06:55 AM

-+-{Important TFP Staff Message}-+-
Let's be careful with the name calling and stick with the issue.

CandleInTheDark · 03-25-2010, 02:58 PM

As events continue to unfold in the aftermath of this debacle, the Canadian Association of University Teachers has issued a sharp rebuke of Dr. Houle.(link)

Quote:

March 22, 2010

Dr. Francois Houle
Vice-President Academic and Provost
University of Ottawa
Room 217A Tabaret Hall
550 Cumberland
Ottawa, Ontario
K1N 6N5

Dear Dr. Houle:

We are deeply disturbed by your correspondence with Ann Coulter regarding her speaking engagement at the University of Ottawa tomorrow. Your admonishing her about speech rights in Canada raises serious questions about the University of Ottawa’s respect for freedom of expression and academic freedom.

The purpose of a university is aptly captured in the University of Toronto’s statement on the “Purpose of the University”:

Within the unique university context, the most crucial of all human rights are the rights of freedom of speech, academic freedom, and freedom of research. And we affirm that these rights are meaningless unless they entail the right to raise deeply disturbing questions and provocative challenges to the cherished beliefs of society at large and of the university itself.

Ms. Coulter certainly does raise disturbing questions and provocative challenges. While many of us profoundly disagree with her, a university should welcome controversial speakers and vigorous debate, not seek to restrict discourse or speakers.

We feel you owe an apology to Ms. Coulter and, even more importantly, you owe the University of Ottawa community an assurance that the administration of the University strongly supports freedom of expression, academic freedom and views the role of the university as fostering and defending these values.

Yours truly,

Penni Stewart James L. Turk
President Executive Director

And the Ottawa citizen fires one off with a perfect summary in the last paragraph. (link)

Quote:

The Ottawa Citizen - March 25, 2010

Ann Coulter's opinions can be obnoxious, offensive and just plain wrong. But she's spot-on about one thing: that the University of Ottawa has shown itself to be a "bush-league" school.

The thuggery of student activists is a growing problem at Canadian campuses, but the spectacle at the University of Ottawa was truly a colossal embarrassment, for both the university and the city. Ottawa is the capital of a G8 country, yet our premier research university is evidently so insecure and insular that a talk-TV pundit from the U.S. represented an intolerable intellectual threat.

We wish we could blame only the students for shaming the university. But the administration was complicit in the successful campaign to shut down Coulter's much publicized talk on campus.

It began when the university's vice-president academic and provost, François Houle, sent Coulter a bizarre e-mail, in which he made it perfectly clear that he detests her polemical style and that she should watch her back, lest she find herself facing "criminal" or "defamation" laws. He told Coulter -- in the most condescending of tones -- that the University of Ottawa has a tradition of "restraint, respect and consideration" and therefore that is why he feels it is necessary to invoke what "may, at first glance, seem like unnecessary restrictions to freedom of expression."

Can anyone imagine an academic leader from Princeton University writing to a TV personality and saying, essentially: "You know, our students are very sensitive, so please when you visit don't say anything that will make them uncomfortable"? Would the vice-president of Harvard do this? Of course not.

The principal effect of Houle's foolish letter was to empower, albeit unwittingly, the student mob who came out Tuesday night to chase Coulter from campus. After all, Houle in so many words called Coulter a hatemonger and made it plain that her kind was not welcome.

The humiliating episode is a giant gift for a publicity-hound like Coulter. In an interview with a U.S. newspaper that had got wind of the incident, Coulter noted that students at serious universities are too "intellectually proud" to shut down speakers they don't agree with. She visits liberal campuses all the time without fearing for her safety. But at the University of Ottawa, she quipped, "their IQ points-to-teeth ratio must be about 1-to-1."

That smarts, but the University of Ottawa deserves the rebuke.

The shutting down of Ann Coulter is only the latest example of totalitarianism on Canadian campuses. At Concordia University in Montreal, thugs famously prevented Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu from speaking. At many campuses, pro-life student groups are harassed and denied official club status. When pro-choice student leaders at Toronto's York University learned that other students had organized a debate over the ethics of abortion, they promptly cancelled it, even though the event had been booked and the flyers printed.

Notice that this ongoing, organized effort to eliminate speech deemed politically unacceptable comes exclusively from the campus left. No one hears of conservative student groups physically interfering with left-wing speakers. A lot of conservative-minded students (and others) were unhappy with the recent Israel Apartheid Week, for example, but no one threatened to assault the organizers or disrupt the event.

We have no love for a buffoonish provocateur like Ann Coulter. It says something about the maturity and calibre of some University of Ottawa students that Coulter is the dignified party in this dispute.

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

I think it is interesting that you, silent_jay, are framing this conversation is such a way as to seem that Conservatives and conservatives are attempting to limit the free speech of leftists and statists, when it is quite clear in this instance that it is the left-wing students and administration who have run roughshod over Ms. Coulter's free speech.

We have seen in recent years an increasingly militant attitude from left-wing students and their puppet student organization such as the CFS. The canceling of debates, shutting down of opposing view points and a contempt for student self-governance is the norm for today's campus.

ottopilot · 03-26-2010, 12:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by silent_jay

Quote:

Originally Posted by ottopilot

You're sometimes quick to slam the US

Are you new to the forum? Have you seen some of the nutjobs we have post here from the US? Pretty easy to make fun of it really, just thankful I'm smart enough to not base my opinions of all Americans on some of their posts.

Yes I've been here... and didn't need to look farther than this very thread to back up my statement:

Quote:

Originally Posted by silent_jay

...and maybe you don't know seeing as you're American, we have laws against hate speech here...

... and in your last post:

Quote:

you guys have way more crazies who are looking for blood than we do, have fun with them, looks enjoyable.

Quote:

Originally Posted by silent_jay

Really this is dumped back in my lap, again that's too bad, you're not very good at this game, maybe go back to schoo land try again.

I'm not familiar with this "Schoo Land" you speak of. Is it a magical land of poor spelling and zero sense of humor? I appreciate the recommendation, but I'll pass.

Quote:

Originally Posted by silent_jay

...they're hoping for a nude pic of the vagina on a stick.

Poor Mr. Coulter.

Quote:

Originally Posted by silent_jay

Threatened her, naw she wasn't threatened, she was just treated like she seems to think MUslims should be treated.....like shit.

Threats end once they become actions. They showed up and demonstrated hostile intent. Is an opinion really justification for terroristic behavior? Is this another example of liberal (in)tolerance?

Quote:

As for blood thirsty mobs, we keep the dk's of Canada under control

Sounds like freedom prevails in this utopia you imagine. I suspect there are far more Canadians that value equal rights without divisively ambiguous definitions of free speech.

silent_jay · 03-26-2010, 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ottopilot

I'm not familiar with this "Schoo Land" you speak of. Is it a magical land of poor spelling and zero sense of humor? I appreciate the recommendation, but I'll pass.

Wow, you've ended at a spelling mistake, that's really lame, you really do need lessons, as for a poor sense of humour, I just generally need something funny to laugh at, and you haven't provided any of that, I mean read your posts, tell me one funny thing there, nothing to be found.

Quote:

Threats end once they become actions. They showed up and demonstrated hostile intent. Is an opinion really justification for terroristic behavior? Is this another example of liberal (in)tolerance?

There were no threats read the articles I posted again:

Quote:

I haven't been able to turn up any of those alleged threats -- not on Facebook, and not on the unspecified "liberal blogs" that she has since cited as the source

Quote:

First, contrary to what Coulter seems to suggest in a brief phone interview with Macleans.ca scribe Colby Cosh, it was not the police who "shut it down." I spoke with Ottawa Police Services media relations officer Alain Boucher this morning, and he told me, in no uncertain terms, that it was her security team that made the decision to call off the event. "We gave her options" -- including, he said, to "find a bigger venue" -- but "they opted to cancel ... It's not up to the Ottawa police to make that decision."

Hey otto you and Coulter have something in common, neither of you let facts get in the way of a good story, as I mean you keep claiming all this violence.

Wow terroristic behaviour, you do love that word, what hostile intent, showing up is demonstrating hostile intent, or is this part of the '2000 with rocks and sticks' you tried lying about before, and has already been proven false.

Quote:

Yes I've been here... and didn't need to look farther than this very thread to back up my statement:

So how is this 'slamming the US'

Quote:

...and maybe you don't know seeing as you're American, we have laws against hate speech here...

That was explaining something I wasn't sure if everyone knew, sorry I forgot no need to explain anything here, everyones a know it all, or assumes they are.

roachboy · 03-26-2010, 09:09 AM

some things are easier than others to explain.

how criticizing ann coulter can be construed as "slamming the us":
conservatives imagine they *are* the united states; they're the "real americans"...haven't you heard?

the syllogism is rudimentary from here so there's no need to run the machinery.
feel free to play along at home.

on logic problems:
there's apparently in some quarters a kind of porosity that affects verbs.
for example, in some quarters it is possible to confuse the statement:

ann coulter is a joke

with the statement:

ann coulter tells jokes.

curiously, these are versions of the same problem. if you as a conservative say you *are* america then in some imaginary world you become it. so there's a pathway that blurs saying into being that's exercised through the repetition of sequences that enact conservative-style identity politics.

following this logic, i imagine it's easy for some conservatives to persuade themselves that they are judy garland. but they don't talk about it because, well, you know, that'd be like telling a joke about the extent to which you are a joke. which is different from simply collapsing being into saying. but you see the danger. o yes you do.

03-22-2010, 02:47 PM	#2 (permalink)
Baraka_Guru warrior bodhisattva Super Moderator Location: East-central Canada	Well, you know, if you support the plight of the Palestinians, you're an anti-Semite. But it's okay to hate on Muslims, because they're anti-Semite too. I hope this "logic" isn't what's at play, but sometimes I wonder. __________________ Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing? —Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön Humankind cannot bear very much reality. —From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

03-23-2010, 11:54 AM	#3 (permalink)
Cimarron29414 Still Free Location: comfortably perched at the top of the bell curve!	So what did Galloway say to get banned? I see it was because of "his views on Afghanistan", but I doubt it was for his views. I'm pretty certain it was for the way he spoke on those views. Without his speech to measure next to Coulter's, I'd say the thread's dead, Zed. The thread's dead. __________________ Gives a man a halo, does mead. "Here lies The_Jazz: Killed by an ambitious, sparkly, pink butterfly."

03-23-2010, 12:31 PM	#5 (permalink)
Cimarron29414 Still Free Location: comfortably perched at the top of the bell curve!	Okay, so I saw dozens of YouTube videos where he called upon the Afghans to rise up and kill his countrymen and Canadians. That's a bit different than Coulter's sarcasm. __________________ Gives a man a halo, does mead. "Here lies The_Jazz: Killed by an ambitious, sparkly, pink butterfly."

03-23-2010, 04:03 PM	#9 (permalink)
CandleInTheDark Addict Location: Where the music's loudest	Not that I agree with banning either person from Canada for their views, I am a bit incredulous that you cannot see the difference in kind -- rather than scale -- between Coulter's quotations and Galloway's (alleged, because I cannot find any quotations) remarks. The more troubling issue for me is that a University authority and student union president are actively thwarting and interfering in this talk. If our universities are supposed to function as a free and open exchange of ideas, why are these authority figures attempting to thwart such an exchange through 'hate speech' chill, as it were. Quite frankly I would be embarrassed to be a student at th __________________ Where there is doubt there is freedom. Last edited by CandleInTheDark; 03-23-2010 at 04:13 PM..

03-23-2010, 04:32 PM	#11 (permalink)
CandleInTheDark Addict Location: Where the music's loudest	I think you are reading into this too much. As I read further on the situation, Galloway was banned from entry for providing financial support a listed terrorist organization(Reference). Now, you can make the argument that Hamas is not a terrorist organization, or that the evidence for support is not adequate to support CBSA's conclusion of financial support. But Galloway was not banned for his speech. __________________ Where there is doubt there is freedom.

03-23-2010, 05:06 PM	#13 (permalink)
CandleInTheDark Addict Location: Where the music's loudest	My apologies for the misread of the thread, but then I have to ask "Where is the comparison?" If you are not speaking to the comments or viewpoints expressed by Mr. Galloway, then there is no analysis to be made as to why he was barred from entry and Ms. Coulter will not be. Edit: Not to say I don't think Ann Coulter's talk is not an important issue to discuss, but for the reasons I outline in my first post, not your Galloway v. Coulter analysis of government action. __________________ Where there is doubt there is freedom. Last edited by CandleInTheDark; 03-23-2010 at 05:13 PM..

03-23-2010, 09:25 PM	#19 (permalink)
silent_jay Her Jay Location: Ontario for now....	Canadian mob violence, nice considering there was no mention of violence in the article, I mean what were they going to be doused with maple syrup and pelted with beavertails.

03-24-2010, 05:04 AM	#20 (permalink)
CandleInTheDark Addict Location: Where the music's loudest	"Levant later wrote this message on Twitter: "Cops advised that proceeding with Coulter event in face of protesters would be dangerous to her and crowd."" How does this not imply violence against Ms. Coulter was, at the very least, a possibility? That said, she won't get far with her complaint to the human rights commissions in Canada. If you're not the right kind of victim they don't want to here from you. The whole system is a farce of Kangaroo trials. But that's neither here nor there. The Mr. Houle and his partner in crime, U of O Student President, were certainly successful in generating a campaign against her talk. I am much more concerned that they would seek to prevent the free exchange of ideas at their school. We would not accept such behaviour in other institutions, why is it acceptable here? __________________ Where there is doubt there is freedom.

03-24-2010, 05:52 AM	#22 (permalink)
Leto Junkie Location: The Danforth	yah, so I didn't think she was a political, but more of an entertainer like Colbert, but harsher: http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/tilted-...lter-real.html __________________ You said you didn't give a fuck about hockey And I never saw someone say that before You held my hand and we walked home the long way You were loosening my grip on Bobby Orr http://dune.wikia.com/wiki/Leto_Atreides_I

03-24-2010, 06:25 AM	#23 (permalink)
Cimarron29414 Still Free Location: comfortably perched at the top of the bell curve!	Silent Jay, You framed the entire OP as if there was some sort of equivalency to their "transgressions". As I did not know who Galloway was, I assumed you acted in good faith and that this was basically a free speech double-standard. I immediately requested that you provide speech of his to compare. However, you did not act in good faith - you left off a critical piece of information. Galloway provided material support to Hamas - an organization listed in Canada as a terrorist organization. So, while I did make an assumption that he was banned for his speech, that assumption was based on a belief that you had provided us with all of the information - which you had not. Furthermore, you didn't even provide "speech" of Galloway to compare to Coulter's. In spite of that fact, we had already begun to debate the "speech" of Coulter, so I continued on that path - the path you set up in your OP and the path that you chose in your responses. You are attempting to do a bait and switch and blame me for saying he was banned for speech. The fact is that it was a disingenuous OP that created that assumption. __________________ Gives a man a halo, does mead. "Here lies The_Jazz: Killed by an ambitious, sparkly, pink butterfly." Last edited by Cimarron29414; 03-24-2010 at 06:51 AM..

03-24-2010, 09:00 AM	#25 (permalink)
Shauk Confused Adult Location: Spokane, WA	Coulter is on my list of people to push off a bridge, given the opportunity.

03-24-2010, 10:28 AM	#27 (permalink)
Leto Junkie Location: The Danforth	Wait! Beavertails???? where??? __________________ You said you didn't give a fuck about hockey And I never saw someone say that before You held my hand and we walked home the long way You were loosening my grip on Bobby Orr http://dune.wikia.com/wiki/Leto_Atreides_I

03-24-2010, 03:05 PM	#29 (permalink)
CandleInTheDark Addict Location: Where the music's loudest	Oh yes, let's blame the victim in this. I hardly call it an irrational decision for the organizers to cancel the talk, given 200 potentially violent protesters outside and no means of handling them. The U of O and it's Student Union created a hostile environment by actively opposing said talks. While Coulter is a divisive figure, you can hardly place the blame on her for an organized resistance to her talks. How is it that the U of Calgary can ensure security (link) and the U of Ottawa cannot? Quite simply, it's a lack of will on the administration's part, and a hostile environment created by Mr. Houle and the Student's Union. I'm sure they support free speech, but only if it's the right kind of speech. __________________ Where there is doubt there is freedom.

03-24-2010, 05:13 PM	#31 (permalink)
CandleInTheDark Addict Location: Where the music's loudest	We already established that Mr. Galloway was not barred from entry due to free speech issues, so your underhanded comment about Mr. Kenney is not conducive to discussion. Quite simply, ensuring a speaker's security should not be an issue, regardless of the political stripe of the campus or the speaker. __________________ Where there is doubt there is freedom.

03-26-2010, 09:09 AM	#40 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	some things are easier than others to explain. how criticizing ann coulter can be construed as "slamming the us": conservatives imagine they are the united states; they're the "real americans"...haven't you heard? the syllogism is rudimentary from here so there's no need to run the machinery. feel free to play along at home. on logic problems: there's apparently in some quarters a kind of porosity that affects verbs. for example, in some quarters it is possible to confuse the statement: ann coulter is a joke with the statement: ann coulter tells jokes. curiously, these are versions of the same problem. if you as a conservative say you are america then in some imaginary world you become it. so there's a pathway that blurs saying into being that's exercised through the repetition of sequences that enact conservative-style identity politics. following this logic, i imagine it's easy for some conservatives to persuade themselves that they are judy garland. but they don't talk about it because, well, you know, that'd be like telling a joke about the extent to which you are a joke. which is different from simply collapsing being into saying. but you see the danger. o yes you do. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 03-26-2010 at 09:15 AM..